This article aims to make sense, from a global perspective, of one of the recent reforms of the accountability system in Ecuadorian education in order to see to what extent these reforms respond to the patterns observed in the global field of education policy in general and Europe in particular. Ball (1998) in an introductory analysis of international perspectives in educational policy has identified neo-liberalism together with performativity and practices related to managerialism as the main influences that are informing current reforms in Western and Northern developed countries.  Acknowledging the particular processes of national/local translation of policies related to accountability in education (Dale, 1999), it is our assumption that these forms of accountability featuring a neo-liberal logic are part of a “generic problem” or a set of “travelling policies” (Ball, 1998; Rizvi, 2004; Vidovich, 2006) that moves across the global sphere and reach the educational policies of the so called “developed” as well as “developing” countries.

Taking as a point of departure this global dimension of accountability reforms in education, in this paper we engage in an analysis of the Ecuadorian case, particularly the analysis of the creation of a “System of Evaluation and Social Accountability” (Sistema Nacional de Evaluación y Rendicion Social de Cuentas [SER]) as part of an overall strategy proposed in an attempt to improve the quality of the education system (as separated from the higher education system).

The topic of accountability has received considerable attention within educational research, mainly in aspects related to the relationships involved, its internal/external dimensions or its horizontal/vertical directions (Behn, 2003; Codd, 1999). In this paper, however, we adopt a more comprehensive approach, that is, we attempt to understand accountability looking for the regime that is being shaped within the new system of evaluation in Ecuador and to make sense of it in light with the global patterns described in the international literature. The word “regime” here is understood as a social institution that governs the actions of members of a determined activity supported by particular principles (Young, 1983). In order to identify the regime, we enquire into the practice, structure and the code of accountability (Ranson, 2003) involved in the proposed system of evaluation.

After the identification of the regime of accountability being promoted in Ecuador, we conclude with a comparison of the characteristics of this regime against the general patterns of accountability featured in education systems of European countries. Here we explore possible tensions emerging from the interactions and in the identities of educational actors when operating under the emerging regimes of accountability.

Ball, S. (1998). Big policies/small world: an introduction to international perspectives in education policy. Comparative Education, 34(2), 119-130. Ball, S. (2003). The teacher's soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 215-228. Codd, J. (1999). Educational reform, accountability and the culture of distrust. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 34(1), 45–53. Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Dale, R. (1999). Specifying globalization effects on national policy: A focus on the mechanisms. Journal of Education Policy, 14(1), 1-17. Ranson, S. (2003). Public accountability in the age of neo-liberal governance. Journal of Education Policy, 18(5), 459-480. Rizvi, F. (2004). Theorizing the global convergence of educational restructuring. In S. Lindblad & T. Popkewitz (Eds.), Educational restructuring: International perspectives on travelling policies. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Simons, M., Olssen, M., & Peters, M. (Eds.). (2009). Re-reading education policies: A handbook studying the policy agenda of the 21st century. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Sistema Nacional de Evaluacion y Rendicion Social de Cuentas [SER] (2008). http://www.educacion.gob.ec/base-legal.html Torres, A. (2009). Introduction. In M. Martinez (Ed.), La educación en America Latina: Entre la calidad y la equidad (pp.9-11). Barcelona: Octaedro. Vidovich, L. (2006). ‘Travelling policy: Contesting ‘global’ policy trends in educational accountability. The annual conference of Australian Sociological Association, 2-10. Australia: TASA 2006. Vidovich, L. (2009). You don’t fatten the pig by weighting it: Contradictory tensions in the ‘policy pandemic’ of accountability. In M. Simons, M. Olssen, & M.Peters (Eds.), Re-reading education policies: A handbook studying the policy agenda of the 21st century (pp. 549-567). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Webb, T. (2005). The anatomy of accountability. Journal of Education Policy, 20(2), 189-208. Young, O. (1983). Regime dynamics: The rise and fall of international regimes. In S. Krasner (Ed.), International regimes. Wisconsin: Cornell University Press.